Kerala High Court
Bail Appl./9742/2011 of A.S.RAMESH Vs STATE OF KERALA on 30 December 2011
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE. P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/9TH POUSHA 1933 BA.No. 9742 of 2011 ( ) AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN BA.6338/2011 DATED 22-08-2011 (CRIME NO.213/2011 OF PUTHENCRUZ POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE. P.S.GOPINATHAN
FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/9TH POUSHA 1933
BA.No. 9742 of 2011 ( )
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN BA.6338/2011 DATED 22-08-2011
(CRIME NO.213/2011 OF PUTHENCRUZ POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT)
.............................................
PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.5
1 A.S.RAMESH, AGED 48 YEARS,
S/O. SIVASANKARAN NAIR
AKKATTU SRIVIHAR
KAITHAKKADU KARA
PATTIMATTO.P.O
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.C.T.SOMAN
SRI.JINEESH
RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT
1. STATE OF KERALA (D.Y.S.P OF POLICE,
MUVATTUPUZHA)
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ERNAKULAM.
BY SRI.P.S.ABDUL KAREEM, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30-12-2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RKM
P.S.GOPINATHAN, J
----------------------------
B.A. NO.9742 OF 2011
--------------------------
Dated this the 30[th] day of December, 2011.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
The petitioner, who is the fifth accused in Crime No.213/2011 of PuthencruzPolice Station for offences punishable under Sections 461, 411 and 381 r/w Section 34 IPC ,apprehending arrest, detention and torture at the hands of the Investigating Officer, filed thispetition seeking an order directing the respondent to release the petitioner on bail in the eventof arrest.2. Having heard either side, I find that the petitioner was not originally arrayedas an accused that later he was arrayed as accused on sufficient allegations. It does not appearthat the petitioner was falsely implicated. With due regard to the nature of the crime, I findthat the submission of the respondent that interrogation of the petitioner is required for thepurpose of investigation has merit. In the above circumstance, this petition is disposed of withdirection to the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer. The InvestigatingOfficer after interrogation shall produce the petitioner before the Magistrate concerned, so asto enable the petitioner to apply for regular bail, which the learned Magistrate shall dispose ofon merits, as far as possible on the same day, provided due notice is given to the AssistantPublic Prosecutor.
Sd/-
P.S.GOPINATHAN,
JUDGE
//True Copy//
P.A to Judge